Drivers for linux are rubbish

[IsawSparks]

How about proprietary OSSv3 drivers for audio cards?

How are those doing?

Or proprietary ethernet adapter drivers?

Good things come to those who wait

This from the man who was of the opinion in this very same thread that he didn't want to program OR wait for things in Open Source which already exist in closed source apps. The same man who told someone else to watch HD Video in Windows because Bluray doesn't read on Linux.

Make your mind up.

[mirv]

It may not stay like this, but until ATI offers a fully functional closed source driver, nvidia-glx will be the driver of choice of for a fully functional desktop linux experience at the high and midrange end.

For the lower to midrange, even the Intel Integrated solutions (save for Clarkdale) offer better performance and more functionality than the ATI closed or open sourced drivers.

Huh?
Or are you referring solely to video playback acceleration? In which case, that's not all there is to a "desktop linux experience".

[bridgman]

ATi started with open source and turned to a proprietary solution, and went back after seeing how much work that is and how little people like it.

Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution. The open source graphics project was resourced separately from existing fglrx work and did not take any resources away from it, ie we were not shifting from proprietary to open source but rather adding open source support as another option.

[IsawSparks]

Huh?
Or are you referring solely to video playback acceleration? In which case, that's not all there is to a "desktop linux experience".

I was very clear. I said fully functional desktop Linux experience. I watch a lot of HD video and so it's a basic function of my desktop computing experience.


Every time I go back to Windows 7, I realise how much I hate it in comparison because I lose nothing important in Linux (nvidia-glx) save for Flash acceleration (and even that can be worked around using VDPAU version of gnash).

I find Windows to be so outmoded in the way it works and performs in comparison to Linux. When something slows in Linux, I know why and know how to fix it. In Windows I'm continually at the mercy of MS and poor documentation and I'm an expert Windows user.

[mirv]

I was very clear. I said fully functional desktop Linux experience. I watch a lot of HD video and so it's a basic function of my desktop computing experience.


Every time I go back to Windows 7, I realise how much I hate it in comparison because I lose nothing important in Linux (nvidia-glx) save for Flash acceleration (and even that can be worked around using VDPAU version of gnash).

I find Windows to be so outmoded in the way it works and performs in comparison to Linux. When something slows in Linux, I know why and know how to fix it. In Windows I'm continually at the mercy of MS and poor documentation and I'm an expert Windows user.

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I'll just have to disagree that intel is better than amd (open source or close binary) for a desktop experience.
I personally prefer fgrlx over nvidia stuff, but that's just with my experiences. Others prefer the nvidia binaries. I guess it depends exactly on what kind of desktop you use.

[barkas]

Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution. The open source graphics project was resourced separately from existing fglrx work and did not take any resources away from it, ie we were not shifting from proprietary to open source but rather adding open source support as another option.

That's a rather positive, yet subtle spin on the whole situation.

[pingufunkybeat]

This from the man who was of the opinion in this very same thread that he didn't want to program OR wait for things in Open Source which already exist in closed source apps.

No, actually, I didn't say that, it's just that you're an idiot.

The same man who told someone else to watch HD Video in Windows because Bluray doesn't read on Linux.

I told you that if you find performance so important that you'll ditch open source for a few fps and a few watts, then you should use closed source. Like the nvidia drivers, CoreAVC, Windows, Sony rootkit, XBox, knock yourself out.

You should just be aware that there are people who will not ditch open source for a few fps or a few watts, and the open source drivers are at a state where most of us don't have to.

[droidhacker]

What are you talking about? You run some other OS than what's provided on your phone?

Sure. Its a little known operating system called ANDROID, which is OPEN SOURCE: http://source.android.com/

The HARDWARE vendor has only produced system images up to 1.6 despite 2.1 being current. What kind of hacker doesn't build the latest version and use that instead?

And as it happened, the jump from 1.6 to 2.1 had a similar result to an xserver upgrade -- it broke all the existing hardware accelerated GPU drivers -- they have since been worked around, but for a time, if you wanted a 7201 on android 2.1, you did without GL and video decode accel.

[pingufunkybeat]

Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution.

Yes, but your proprietary support focuses on modern hardware and stable enterprise distributions. This makes your (well, the fglrx team's) life easier.

Supporting every possible combination of hardware and distro is a lot of work that works far better when the drivers are open. Wasn't this one of the reasons why the support for older chipsets was dropped?

[droidhacker]

Actually we believe that the need for proprietary drivers is as strong as ever (at least for high end discrete GPU markets), but that *only* having proprietary binary drivers was not a sufficient solution. The open source graphics project was resourced separately from existing fglrx work and did not take any resources away from it, ie we were not shifting from proprietary to open source but rather adding open source support as another option.

I may be missing something here, but how does being closed source and proprietary improve the suitability of the drivers for "high end discrete GPU markets"? Assuming that you had two equally/equivalently functional drivers, one open and one closed, what benefit could being closed bring?